(1) Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Description of Business

We were formed in California on March 8, 1991. We specialize in purchasing and servicing retail automobile installment sale contracts (“automobile contracts” or “finance receivables”) originated by licensed motor vehicle dealers located throughout the United States (“dealers”) in the sale of new and used automobiles, light trucks and passenger vans. Through our purchases, we provide indirect financing to dealer customers for borrowers with limited credit histories or past credit problems (“sub-prime customers”). We serve as an alternative source of financing for dealers, allowing sales to customers who otherwise might not be able to obtain financing. In addition to purchasing installment purchase contracts directly from dealers, we have also (i) lent money directly to consumers for loans secured by vehicles, (ii) purchased immaterial amounts of vehicle purchase money loans from non-affiliated lenders, and (iii) acquired installment purchase contracts in four merger and acquisition transactions. In this report, we refer to all of such contracts and loans as "automobile contracts."

(2) Finance Receivables

Our portfolio of finance receivables consists of small-balance homogeneous contracts comprising a single segment and class that is collectively evaluated for impairment on a portfolio basis according to delinquency status. Our contract purchase guidelines are designed to produce a homogenous portfolio. For key terms such as interest rate, length of contract, monthly payment and amount financed, there is relatively little variation from the average for the portfolio. We report delinquency on a contractual basis. Once a contract becomes greater than 90 days delinquent, we do not recognize additional interest income until the obligor under the contract makes sufficient payments to be less than 90 days delinquent. Any payments received on a contract that is greater than 90 days delinquent are first applied to accrued interest and then to principal reduction.

In January 2018 the Company adopted the fair value method of accounting for finance receivables acquired after 2017. Finance receivables measured at fair value are recorded separately on the Company’s Balance Sheet and are excluded from all tables in this footnote.

We consider an automobile contract delinquent when an obligor fails to make at least 90% of a contractually due payment by the following due date, which date may have been extended within limits specified in the servicing agreements. The period of delinquency is based on the number of days payments are contractually past due, as extended where applicable. Automobile contracts less than 31 days delinquent are not included. In certain circumstances we will grant obligors one-month payment extensions to assist them with temporary cash flow problems. The only modification of terms is to advance the obligor’s next due date by one month and extend the maturity date of the receivable by one month. In certain limited cases, a two-month extension may be granted. There are no other concessions such as a reduction in interest rate, forgiveness of principal or of accrued interest. Accordingly, we consider such extensions to be insignificant delays in payments rather than troubled debt restructurings. Automobile finance receivables, net of unearned interest was $186.7 million and $232.4 million as of March 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021, respectively. The following table summarizes the delinquency status of finance receivables as of March 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021: 

Finance receivables totaling $2.1 million and $2.7 million at March 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021, respectively, including all receivables greater than 90 days delinquent, have been placed on non-accrual status as a result of their delinquency status.

Allowance for Credit Losses – Finance Receivables

The allowance for credit losses is a valuation account that is deducted from the amortized cost basis of finance receivables to present the net amount expected to be collected. Charge offs are deducted from the allowance when management believes that collectability is unlikely.

Management estimates the allowance using relevant available information, from internal and external sources, relating to past events, current conditions and, reasonable and supportable forecasts. We believe our historical credit loss experience provides the best basis for the estimation of expected credit losses. Consequently, we use historical loss experience for older receivables, aggregated into vintage pools based on their calendar quarter of origination, to forecast expected losses for less seasoned quarterly vintage pools.

We measure the weighted average monthly incremental change in cumulative net losses for the vintage pools in the relevant historical period. For the pools in the relevant historical period, we consider each pool’s performance from its inception through the end of the current period. We then apply the results of the historical analysis to less seasoned vintage pools beginning with each vintage pool’s most recent actual cumulative net loss experience and extrapolating from that point based on the historical data. We believe the pattern and magnitude of losses on older vintages allows us to establish a reasonable and supportable forecast of less seasoned vintages.

Our contract purchase guidelines are designed to produce a homogenous portfolio. For key credit characteristics of individual contracts such as obligor credit history, job stability, residence stability and ability to pay, there is relatively little variation from the average for the portfolio. Similarly, for key structural characteristics such as loan-to-value, length of contract, monthly payment and amount financed, there is relatively little variation from the average for the portfolio. Consequently, we do not believe there are significant differences in risk characteristics between various segments of our portfolio.

Our methodology incorporates historical pools that are sufficiently seasoned to capture the magnitude and trends of losses within those vintage pools. Furthermore, the historical period encompasses a substantial volume of receivables over periods that include fluctuations in the competitive landscape, the Company’s rates of growth, size of our managed portfolio and fluctuations in economic growth and unemployment.

In consideration of the depth and breadth of the historical period, and the homogeneity of our portfolio, we generally do not adjust historical loss information for differences in risk characteristics such as credit or structural composition of segments of the portfolio or for changes in environmental conditions such as changes in unemployment rates, collateral values or other factors. However, we have considered how certain qualitative factors may affect future credit losses and have incorporated our judgement of the effect of such factors into our estimates.

The following table presents the amortized cost basis of our finance receivables by annual vintage as of March 31, 2022 and 2021. 

The following table presents a summary of the activity for the allowance for finance credit losses for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2022 and 2021: 

For the three months ended March 31, 2022, we recorded a reduction to provision for credit losses on finance receivables in the amount of $9.4 million. The reserve decrease was primarily due to a decrease in lifetime expected credit losses resulting from improved credit performance, an improved macroeconomic outlook and higher used car prices. The Company did not make additional provisions for credit losses for the three months ended March 31, 2021.

Excluded from finance receivables are contracts that were previously classified as finance receivables but were reclassified as other assets because we have repossessed the vehicle securing the Contract. The following table presents a summary of such repossessed inventory together with the allowance for losses in repossessed inventory that is not included in the allowance for finance credit losses: 

(3) Securitization Trust Debt

We have completed many securitization transactions that are structured as secured borrowings for financial accounting purposes. The debt issued in these transactions is shown on our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as “Securitization trust debt,” and the components of such debt are summarized in the following table: 

Debt issuance costs of $12.5 million and $12.0 million as of March 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021, respectively, have been excluded from the table above. These debt issuance costs are presented as a direct deduction to the carrying amount of the Securitization trust debt on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.

All of the securitization trust debt was sold in private placement transactions to qualified institutional buyers. The debt was issued through our wholly-owned bankruptcy remote subsidiaries and is secured by the assets of such subsidiaries, but not by our other assets.

The terms of the securitization agreements related to the issuance of the securitization trust debt and the warehouse credit facilities require that we meet certain delinquency and credit loss criteria with respect to the pool of receivables, and certain of the agreements require that we maintain minimum levels of liquidity and not exceed maximum leverage levels. As of March 31, 2022, we were in compliance with all such covenants.

We are responsible for the administration and collection of the automobile contracts. The securitization agreements also require certain funds be held in restricted cash accounts to provide additional collateral for the borrowings, to be applied to make payments on the securitization trust debt or as pre-funding proceeds from a term securitization prior to the purchase of additional collateral. As of March 31, 2022, restricted cash under the various agreements totaled approximately $164.6 million. Interest expense on the securitization trust debt consists of the stated rate of interest plus amortization of additional costs of borrowing. Additional costs of borrowing include facility fees, amortization of deferred financing costs and discounts on notes sold. Deferred financing costs and discounts on notes sold related to the securitization trust debt are amortized using a level yield method. Accordingly, the effective cost of the securitization trust debt is greater than the contractual rate of interest disclosed above.

Our wholly-owned bankruptcy remote subsidiaries were formed to facilitate the above asset-backed financing transactions. Similar bankruptcy remote subsidiaries issue the debt outstanding under our credit facilities. Bankruptcy remote refers to a legal structure in which it is expected that the applicable entity would not be included in any bankruptcy filing by its parent or affiliates. All of the assets of these subsidiaries have been pledged as collateral for the related debt. All such transactions, treated as secured financings for accounting and tax purposes, are treated as sales for all other purposes, including legal and bankruptcy purposes. None of the assets of these subsidiaries are available to pay other creditors.

(4) Debt

The terms and amounts of our other debt outstanding at March 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021 are summarized below: 

Unamortized debt issuance costs of $566,000 and $629,000 as of March 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021, respectively, have been excluded from the amount reported above for residual interest financing. Similarly, unamortized debt issuance costs of $1.2 million and $400,000 as of March 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021, respectively, have been excluded from the Warehouse lines of credit amounts in the table above. These debt issuance costs are presented as a direct deduction to the carrying amount of the debt on our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

(5) Interest Income and Interest Expense

The following table presents the components of interest income: 

The following table presents the components of interest expense: 

(6) Earnings Per Share

Earnings per share for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2022 and 2021 were calculated using the weighted average number of shares outstanding for the related period. The following table reconciles the number of shares used in the computations of basic and diluted earnings per share for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2022 and 2021: 

If the anti-dilutive effects of common stock equivalents were considered, shares included in the diluted earnings per share calculation for the three-months ended March 31, 2022 and 2021 would have included an additional 558,000 and 7.5 million shares, respectively, attributable to the exercise of outstanding options and warrants.

(7) Income Taxes

We file numerous consolidated and separate income tax returns with the United States and with many states. With few exceptions, we are no longer subject to U.S. federal, state, or local examinations by tax authorities for years before 2015.

As of March 31,2022, and December 31, 2021, we had no unrecognized tax benefits for uncertain tax positions. We do not anticipate that total unrecognized tax benefits will significantly change due to any settlements of audits or expirations of statutes of limitations over the next 12 months.

The Company and its subsidiaries file a consolidated federal income tax return and combined or stand-alone state franchise tax returns for certain states. We utilize the asset and liability method of accounting for income taxes, under which deferred income taxes are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to the differences between the financial statement values of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred taxes of a change in tax rates is recognized in income in the period that includes the enactment date.

Deferred tax assets are recognized subject to management’s judgment that realization is more likely than not. A valuation allowance is recognized for a deferred tax asset if, based on the weight of the available evidence, it is more likely than not that some portion of the deferred tax asset will not be realized. In making such judgments, significant weight is given to evidence that can be objectively verified. Although realization is not assured, we believe that the realization of the recognized net deferred tax asset of $18.9 million as of March 31, 2022 is more likely than not based on forecasted future net earnings. Our net deferred tax asset of $18.9 million consists of approximately $11.6 million of net U.S. federal deferred tax assets and $7.3 million of net state deferred tax assets.

Income tax expense was $8.2 million for the three months ended March 31, 2022, representing effective income tax rates of 28%. For the prior year period, income tax expense was $2.8 million for the three months ended March 31, 2021 representing an effective tax rate of 35%.

(8) Legal Proceedings

Consumer Litigation. We are routinely involved in various legal proceedings resulting from our consumer finance activities and practices, both continuing and discontinued. Consumers can and do initiate lawsuits against us alleging violations of law applicable to collection of receivables, and such lawsuits sometimes allege that resolution as a class action is appropriate.

For the most part, we have legal and factual defenses to consumer claims, which we routinely contest or settle (for immaterial amounts) depending on the particular circumstances of each case. There are as of the date of this report two civil actions that could possibly result in a material liability, if resolved adversely and on a class basis, as the respective plaintiffs allege would be appropriate.

Following our filing of a complaint for a deficiency judgment in the Superior Court at Waterbury, Connecticut, the defendant filed a cross-claim alleging that our deficiency notices were not compliant with Connecticut law, and seeking relief on behalf of a class of Connecticut obligors whose vehicles we had repossessed. The defendant’s contract provided for resolution of disputes exclusively by arbitration, and exclusively on an individual basis, not a class basis. Nevertheless, in August 2021, the court denied our motion to compel arbitration, without opinion. In April 2022, a motion for certification of a class was filed but has not been ruled upon. It is reasonable to expect that resolution of these claims will be on a class basis.

Wage and Hour Claim. On September 24, 2018, a former employee filed a lawsuit against us in the Superior Court of Orange County, California, alleging that we incorrectly classified our sales representatives as outside salespersons exempt from overtime wages, mandatory break periods and certain other employee protective provisions of California and federal law. The complaint seeks injunctive relief, an award of unpaid wages, liquidated damages, and attorney fees and interest. The plaintiff purports to act on behalf of a class of similarly situated employees and ex-employees. As of the date of this report, no motion for class certification has been filed or granted.

We believe that our compensation practices with respect to our sales representatives are compliant with applicable law. Accordingly, we have defended and intend to continue to defend this lawsuit.

Massachusetts Civil Investigative Demand. In September 2021, we received a civil investigative demand from the Office of the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts relating to the Company’s communications with and repossession notices sent to Massachusetts customers. We are cooperating with the inquiry. At this time, it is not possible to determine any amount of loss that is probable and measurable.

In General. There can be no assurance as to the outcomes of the matters described or referenced above. We record at each measurement date, most recently as of March 31, 2022, our best estimate of probable incurred losses for legal contingencies, including the matters identified above, and consumer claims. The amount of losses that may ultimately be incurred cannot be estimated with certainty. However, based on such information as is available to us, we believe that the total of probable incurred losses for legal contingencies as of March 31, 2022 is $3.4 million, and that the range of reasonably possible losses for the legal proceedings and contingencies we face, including those described or identified above, as of March 31, 2022 does not exceed $11.3 million.

Accordingly, we believe that the ultimate resolution of such legal proceedings and contingencies should not have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial condition. We note, however, that in light of the uncertainties inherent in contested proceedings there can be no assurance that the ultimate resolution of these matters will not be material to our operating results for a particular period, depending on, among other factors, the size of the loss or liability imposed and the level of our income for that period.

(9) Fair Value Measurements

ASC 820, "Fair Value Measurements" clarifies the principle that fair value should be based on the assumptions market participants would use when pricing an asset or liability and establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the information used to develop those assumptions. Under the standard, fair value measurements would be separately disclosed by level within the fair value hierarchy.

ASC 820 defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value, establishes a three-level valuation hierarchy for disclosure of fair value measurement and enhances disclosure requirements for fair value measurements. The three levels are defined as follows: level 1 - inputs to the valuation methodology are quoted prices (unadjusted) for identical assets or liabilities in active markets; level 2 – inputs to the valuation methodology include quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets, and inputs that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly, for substantially the full term of the financial instrument; and level 3 – inputs to the valuation methodology are unobservable and significant to the fair value measurement.

Effective January 2018 we have elected to use the fair value method to value our portfolio of finance receivables acquired in January 2018 and thereafter.

Our valuation policies and procedures have been developed by our Accounting department in conjunction with our Risk department and with consultation with outside valuation experts. Our policies and procedures have been approved by our Chief Executive and our Board of Directors and include methodologies for valuation, internal reporting, calibration and back testing. Our periodic review of valuations includes an analysis of changes in fair value measurements and documentation of the reasons for such changes. There is little available third-party information such as broker quotes or pricing services available to assist us in our valuation process.

Our level 3, unobservable inputs reflect our own assumptions about the factors that market participants use in pricing similar receivables and are based on the best information available in the circumstances. They include such inputs as estimates for the magnitude and timing of net charge-offs and the rate of amortization of the portfolio of finance receivable. Significant changes in any of those inputs in isolation would have a significant effect on our fair value measurement.

For the quarter ended March 31, 2022, the Company evaluated the appropriate fair value and future earnings rate of existing receivables compared to recently acquired receivables and our assessment of potential additional future net losses on the portfolio of finance receivables carried at fair value and did not record a mark down to that portfolio.

The table below presents a reconciliation of the finance receivables measured at fair value on a recurring basis using significant unobservable inputs: 

The table below compares the fair values of these finance receivables to their contractual balances for the periods shown: 

The following table provides certain qualitative information about our level 3 fair value measurements: 

The following table summarizes the delinquency status of these finance receivables measured at fair value as of March 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021: 

Repossessed vehicle inventory, which is included in Other assets on our unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheet, is measured at fair value using level 2 assumptions based on our actual loss experience on sale of repossessed vehicles. At March 31, 2022 the finance receivables related to the repossessed vehicles in inventory totaled $3.6 million. We have applied a valuation adjustment, or loss allowance, of $1.6 million, which is based on a recovery rate of approximately 56%, resulting in an estimated fair value and carrying amount of $2.0 million. The fair value and carrying amount of the repossessed inventory at December 31, 2021 was $2.4 million after applying a valuation adjustment of $1.9 million.

There were no transfers in or out of level 1, level 2 or level 3 assets and liabilities for the three months ended March 31, 2022 and 2021.

The estimated fair values of financial assets and liabilities at March 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021, were as follows: